Brief of Amici Curiae Electronic Frontier Foundation, Brennan Center for Justice, The Constitution Project, National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and National Association of Federal Defenders in Support of Petitioner.

Brief of Amici Curiae Electronic Frontier Foundation, Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Asian Law Caucus, Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), CAIR California, CAIR Florida, CAIR New York, CAIR Ohio, and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Defendant-Appellant.

Brief of Amici Curiae Electronic Frontier Foundation, Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Asian Law Caucus, Brennan Center for Justice, Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), CAIR California, CAIR Florida, CAIR Missouri, CAIR New York, CAIR Ohio, CAIR Dallas/Fort Worth, and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Defendant-Appellant.

In Riley v. California, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled police cannot search a cellphone’s data without a warrant under the Fourth Amendment’s search incident to arrest exception. The Court recognized that “digital” is different. Riley builds upon the decision in United States v. Jones, which found the warrantless installation of a GPS device on a car constituted a “search.” Defense attorneys can use Riley and Jones to (1) mount constitutional challenges to public surveillance via video cameras or drones; (2) demand particularity in the execution of digital searches and seizures; and (3) argue for limits to electronic searches at the border.